Published By The Attorneys of the National Insurance Law Forum

Tag Archives: liability

By Diane Polscer on May 15, 2017 Posted in Bad Faith/Extra Contractual,Liability Coverage,Recent CasesInsurers should be aware of the recent Washington State Supreme Court decision in Xia v. ProBuilders Specialty, No. 92436-8 ___ Wn.2d ____ (2017) handed down on April 27, 2017. The decision may have significant impacts not only in coverage litigation regarding environmental contamination, but across a broad spectrum of liability claims under CGL policies. In short, the Washington State Supreme Court… Continue Reading

By Diane Polscer on October 21, 2015 Posted in Duty to DefendIn the recent case West Hills Development Company v. Chartis Claims, Inc., et al., 273 Or App 155 (2015) (“West Hills”), the Oregon Court of Appeals provided further guidance to Oregon insurers on their handling of tenders of defense from parties who contend that they are additional insureds. In particular, the court addressed the scope… Continue Reading

By Diane Polscer on October 8, 2014 Posted in UncategorizedIn our increasingly digital age, we should expect a corresponding increase in the number of insurance claims involving lost data, security breaches, inadvertent dissemination of private information, and similar issues related to technology. However, the usual insurance policies – such as general liability, first-party property insurance and errors and omissions coverage – are not a… Continue Reading

By Sara Thorpe on February 25, 2014 Posted in Liability CoverageSummary judgment was granted in favor of insurers (including Zurich and Mitsui Sumitomo), against Sony in a case of first impression on the issue of insurance coverage for cyber liabilities under commercial general liability primary policies. The New York state court ruled that primary insurers are not obligated to defend Sony against lawsuits brought by… Continue Reading

By Sara Thorpe on November 6, 2013 Posted in Liability CoverageHenkel, issued by California’s Supreme Court in 2003 provided a rule for determining whether there was an obligation to provide insurance coverage for liabilities of a company that the insurance company had not insured but that was in some way related to the policyholder. Henkel Corp. v. Hartford (2003) 29 Cal.4th 934. The decision was… Continue Reading

By Mike Aylward on May 21, 2013 Posted in NewsThe American Law Institute voted yesterday to adopt most of Chapters One and Two of the proposed Principles of the Law of Liability Insurance. Although the spirited debate concerning some of these provisions prevented the ALI from considering Section 16-23 of Tentative Draft No. 1, the ALI did approve those portions of the draft dealing with principles… Continue Reading

By Diane Polscer on February 27, 2013 Posted in Recent CasesWe wanted to alert you to a recent Washington Supreme Court case that alters the scope of the attorney client relationship between an insurer and coverage counsel. In Cedell v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Washington, –Wn. – (February 21, 2013), the Washington Supreme Court created a presumption of no attorney-client privilege for "first party" insured’s… Continue Reading

By Sara Thorpe on August 12, 2012 Posted in Liability CoverageTo add to the post on the State of California (Stringfellow) decision from California’s Supreme Court, the decision is consistent with California’s highest court’s adherence to and strict interpretation of policy language. Public policy did not play a part in this, or most, coverage determinations. On the "all sums" ruling, the court relied on the policies’ insuring agreements which provided… Continue Reading

By Diane Polscer on June 25, 2012 Posted in Recent CasesEmployers—who are often sued for discrimination, retaliation, breach of contract, and statutory violations—have increasingly turned to Employment Practices Liability Insurance (EPL) to protect themselves against a coverage gap for employment-related claims. In turn, coverage disputes under EPL policies have led to litigation over how the policies should be interpreted and administered. It should come as… Continue Reading

By Diane Polscer on April 5, 2012 Posted in Liability CoverageIn the context of “additional insured” coverage, the question of whether a tendering party qualifies as an insured is often complicated by restrictions in additional insured endorsements that limit who qualifies for “additional insured” status. Of these restrictions, one of the most debated is the “ongoing operations” limitation, commonly stated as follows: “Such person or… Continue Reading

By Sara Thorpe on November 20, 2010 Posted in Liability CoverageIn 1998, the California Supreme Court, consistent with contract interpretation rules, took a literal approach to what is meant by “suit” in liability insurance policies, ruling that when not otherwise defined, “suit” means a proceeding brought in a court of law by the filing of a complaint. Foster-Gardner, Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. (1998)… Continue Reading

By Diane Polscer on July 14, 2010 Posted in Recent CasesThe issue of whether a liability policy of a dissolved corporation is an undistributed corporate asset capable of being distributed has not been addressed by Oregon’s state appellate courts. In the recent Oregon District Court opinion, Ironwood Homes, Inc. v. Bowen, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59933 (D. Or. June 14, 2010), Oregon District Court Judge Anna… Continue Reading

By Sara Thorpe on December 24, 2009 Posted in Liability Coverage2000, 2001, 2002 – Of the final decisions issued by the California courts during those years which had a significant impact on insurers over the course of this decade, in addition to what Mike Aylward notes, I would add the following: 2000 No comparative bad faith. Kransco Int. v. American Empire Surplus Lines Ins. Co. (2000)… Continue Reading

By Sara Thorpe on May 7, 2009 Posted in Liability CoverageA recent case in California, takes an insurer’s duty to search for coverage a step farther than required to date and, while the insurer acted correctly on the coverage of which it was aware and acted promptly as it discovered additional coverage, that was not enough – it was found liable to the tune of $3.2… Continue Reading

By Diane Polscer on May 4, 2009 Posted in Recent CasesIn Hennessy v. Mutual of Enumclaw Ins. Co., A133592 (April 29, 2009), Oregon’s Court of Appeals adopted a “none of the above” approach to first-party “collapse” claims. The majority of jurisdictions that have considered the undefined term “collapse” have found coverage to be triggered by one of the following three circumstances: (1) a finding of… Continue Reading

By Sara Thorpe on November 16, 2008 Posted in Liability CoverageWhile not a new development, this case is a reminder that logic and common sense prevail in evaluating coverage, even in the face of tragedy. The California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District affirmed an order granting summary judgment in favor of an insurer in an action for breach of the duties to… Continue Reading

By Diane Polscer on October 10, 2008 Posted in Recent CasesGeico Insurance Co. v. Hall, 2008 U.S. Dist. Lexis 77347 (S.D. Miss. Oct. 1, 2008) presents at least some evidence that in some states insurers are able to make mistakes and still prevail. When Geico filed its complaint, it included a copy of the insurance policy Geico claimed was the operative policy at issue. Under… Continue Reading

By Chris Martin on October 16, 2007 Posted in Liability CoverageOn October 12th, the Supreme Court of Texas issued a surprising decision of importance to liability carriers doing business in Texas regarding the reimbursement claims available to liability insurers against other insurers in Texas. … Continue Reading

About This Blog

National Insurance Law Forum is a public service intended to facilitate discussion and an exchange of ideas and information among insurance industry professionals, risk managers, attorneys, policyholders, students, and others with an interest in the development of American insurance law....MORE...